Water conversation is a major concern in many areas and is likely to become even more important in the future as populations increase resulting in more water consumption. Practicing water conversation on a regular basis has many benefits including saving money both in the short term and long term. In the short term, water conservation saves the consumer money by reducing a consumer's monthly water utility bill. In the long term, consumers save money by postponing or even preventing the building of new water supply infrastructures thereby reducing the per unit cost (or slowing the increase in cost) of water. In addition, those in charge of water utilities have become increasing militant in the way they promulgate rules regulating water usage and imposing fines for violation thereof.
While there are clearly incentives for home owners to practice water conversation on a regular basis, many households do not have the equipment required to facilitate proper water conversation. For example, leaks resulting in “continuous flow” in a water system may be difficult to detect. Indeed, one of the most costly household wastes of water is a leaky toilet. According to the American Water Works Association (AWWA), toilets account for 45% of all indoor water use in a typical residence. Additionally, it is estimated that 20% of all toilets leak. A serious toilet leak left undetected and uncorrected for any length of time can result in both a huge loss of water and money.
Simple leak detection tests have been developed to determine if a toilet is leaking including placing dye tablets or food coloring in a toilets tank or marking the water line in the toilet bowl after flushing and checking for a drop in water level. Such prior art systems may be effective in detecting certain types of leaks; however, they have their issues. First, for dye tablets, a consumer would typically need to suspect a water leak before using the tablets which means a leak has been occurring over some period of time before a consumer would be prompted into action. Second, dye tablet tests are not very convenient and many consumers may be inclined to simply tolerate small leaks. Third, such tests are not easily applied to other types of leaks such as leaks that may occur in other water paths within a household.
Ghertner et al. teaches electronic based tank leak detection and reporting system in U.S. Pat. No. 6,802,084 (incorporated by this reference for all that it discloses). Ghertner et al. teaches using a timing module to determine the time required to refill a tank. A sensor is used to detect when a lever is actuated to initiate flow to refill such tank. The timing module must also calculate lower and upper threshold values used to define a leak condition. When a leak is detected, local and/or remote alarms may be activated to signal a leak condition.
The Ghertner et al. type systems have their issues as well. First, such a system is not easily applied to other types of leaks that may occur in water paths within the household not associated with a toilet. Second, the Ghertner et al. system must be applied within the toilet. A leak can develop between the supply line and the toilet which would not be detected. Third, the Ghertner et al. system is more complicated to install than is necessary. Fourth, the Ghertner et al. system does not provide a smart alarm activation function to avoid annoying a user at inconvenient times (such as in the middle of night).
What is needed is an automatic electronic monitoring apparatus that can be used to detect an unwanted flow condition in a plurality of applications including a toilet system comprising a smart alarm system that only activates an alarm condition when a predefined condition is detected.
There are some billing systems that do not provide the same level of incentive to practice water conservation as described above. For example, there are multiple family apartment complexes where the tenants do not receive an individual water bill. For such systems, the public utility measures water usage for the entire property at a master meter and bills the property owner based on the master meter reading. The property owner will clearly recover the water consumption costs via rent charged to the tenants; however, the individual tenants do not have the incentive to conserve. Indeed, such a system sets up a “tragedy of the commons” system that gives each tenant the incentive to use at least as much water as his neighbor. In addition, such a system provides very little incentive for a tenant to notify the landlord of a water leak.
What is needed is an automatic electronic monitoring apparatus that can be used to detect unwanted flow in a plurality of applications including a toilet system where the apparatus provides extra incentive to have the leak eliminated.